Preparation for negotiation: Issue and process

Personnel Review

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 50-60

  Fells, Ray ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030560556     PISSN: 00483486     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/00483489610110087     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Lewicki, R.J., Litterer, J.A., Minton, J.M. and Saunders, D.M., Negotiation, Richard D. Irwin, Burr Ridge, IL, 1994.
2. Byrnes, J.F., "Ten guidelines for effective negotiating", Business Horizons, May-June 1987, pp. 7-12.
3. Fuller, G., The Negotiator's Handbook, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1991.
4. Leritz, L., No-Fault Negotiating, Warner, New York, NY, 1987.
5. Morrison, W.F., The Pre-Negotiation Planning Book, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 1985.
6. Sperber, P., Fail-Safe Business Negotiating, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1983.
7. Roloff, M.E. and Jordan, J.M., "The fruits and foibles of planning ahead", in Putnam, L.L. and Roloff, M.E. (Eds), Communication and Negotiation, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 1992, pp. 21-45.
8. Rojot, J., Negotiation: From Theory to Practice, Macmillan, Basingstoke, 1991.
9. Walton, R.E. and McKersie, R.B., A Behavioural Theory of Labor Negotiations, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 1965.
10. Lewicki, R.J. and Littler, J.A., Negotiation, Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, IL, 1985.
11. Fisher, R. and Ury, W., Getting to Yes, Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, MA, 1981.
12. Douglas, A., Industrial Peacemaking, Columbia University Press, New York, NY, 1962.
13. White, S.B. and Neale, M.A., "Reservation prices, resistance points and BATNAs: determining the parameters of acceptable negotiated outcomes" ,Negotiation Journal, Vol. 7 No. 4, 1991, pp. 379-88.
14. Pruitt, D.G., Negotiation Behaviour, Academic Press, New York, NY, 1981.
15. Lax, D.A. and Sebenius, J.K., The Manager as Negotiator, Free Press, New York, NY, 1986.
16. Thompson, L. and Hastie, R., "Judgment tasks and biases in negotiation", in Sheppard, B.H., Bazerman, M.H. and Lewicki, R.J. (Eds), Research on Negotiation in Organizations, Vol. 2, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 1990, pp. 31-54.
17. Zartman, I.W. and Berman, M.R., The Practical Negotiator, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 1982.
18. Pruitt, D.G. and Carnevale, P.J., Negotiation in Social Conflict, Open University Press, Buckingham, 1993.
19. Rubin, J.Z. and Brown, B.R., The Social Psychology of Bargaining and Negotiation, Academic Press, New York, NY, 1975.
20. The difficulties associated with drawing conclusions from negotiation simulations are well known, particularly that the one-off nature of an exercise reduces the inducement to further co-operation which comes from an expectation of future co-operative interaction. Further, the motivational orientations of the participants can be manipulated, typically to require each negotiator to be interested in the other party achieving its outcomes, as in the dual-concern model. The interesting question is the extent to which co-operative negotiation behaviour emerges without these particular inducements, that is, the extent to which co-operation is generated simply by the mixed motive nature of the negotiation process itself. The simulation used in this research is a one-off, generally competitive situation which is the worst case as far as the development of co-operative interaction is concerned. It is felt that this provided a better test of how negotiators might react than in a situation which is constructed so as to encourage co-operative approaches.
21. Fells, R.E., Movement, Phases and Deadlocks, Industrial Relations Research Monograph No. 12, University of New South Wales, Kensington, 1986.
22. As this number is less than those who did not consider or think that a deadlock would occur, it is possible that some respondents gave consideration to the issue in response to the question itself, not actually as part of their preparation.
23. Pruitt, D.G., "Strategic choice in negotiation", American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 167-94.
24. Ury, W., Getting Past No, Bantam, New York, NY, 1991.
25. Fells, R.E., "Developing trust in negotiation", Employee Relations, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 33-45.
26. Preparation for a negotiation would be influenced by the circumstances of the case and also by one's understanding of the essential nature of the process. Notwithstanding the generally distributive nature of the negotiation simulation, the participants did not prepare as if it was to be a competitive interaction. However, their reliance on positions suggests that they were not anticipating the ideal-type problem-solving situation either. The participants were not asked whether they were working to a particular model or understanding of the negotiation process, but the findings do suggest that a broad phase model (see, for example, Douglas[12]) might have underpinned their approach.